I have kept thinking that there must be something profound to say about the whole A level debacle. And yet, at least initially, in a great many ways there is not. What we have seen is straightforward incompetence.
It can, of course, be argued that because the devolved governments all followed London's lead on seeking to establish an algorithm to replace exams - and each in turn also followed Ofqual's design principles - that the mistakes are not peculiar to the Tory government at Westminster. But I am not completely convinced. Ofqual's approach was bound to dominate when there were common university entrance systems, as there are. In that case the blame for this does fall fairly on Johnson and his, already proven to be incompetent, education secretary Gavin Williamson.
Let's dismiss Williamson's role though. I think it safe to say he will soon be a forever-to-be-forgotten former minister. And rightly so. But Johnson will still be there. In that case the blame for what has happened can only lie with him.
We have a prime minister who ruthlessly culled his party of talent to make sure he looked competent. He chose his ministers from amongst those who were willing to support a very obviously incompetent project that is bound to end in abject failure and misery, which is a kind description of Brexit. And he refuses to consider detail, thinking that is for others to deal with. The result is a government of incompetent dogmatists. Not an exception can be spotted (it's just taking a little time for Sunak's inability to be come apparent, as it will).
What we now know is that this level of incompetence comes at an enormous cost. I think of the young man I know who did not get his forecast grades that his parents (in his case) had invested so much in and was rejected by his first choice university, to then accept a place at a second (albeit good) university with a heavy heart, but who now finds that this was exactly the wrong thing to have done as if he had not taken that second option so quickly he might be at his first choice after all. I am quite sure that this is a Tory family to its core, that's now being stressed beyond to levels it could not have imagined by a situation of this government's creation. The story will be commonplace. It is thought that there may be 55,000 already in this situation.
This is gross injustice. And the government had warning that it would happen. They saw what happened in Scotland and refused to take note. That refusal - reiterated on Saturday - is almost as bad as the original inability to ask appropriate questions of the Ofqual system and to anticipate the reaction that arose when I can promise that, as a parent, the stress about the issues this proposed system might give rise to was a real, lived, experience.
It's easy to say as a result - as another person told me last night - that they will never, ever vote Tory again after this (and in their case I am well aware that they have) but the question remains, who will they vote for in that case?
Of course Keir Starmer appears competent in this scenario, playing the role of the sober and dependable lawyer that he is. But did he propose an alternative before this fiasco developed? The simple answer is no, and it cannot be said that Labour did not have to face the issue, because it did in Wales. And it's pointless for the left to say that Corbyn would have done better, because there is not a shred of evidence that he would have done. His shadow education secretary is now deputy leader, and has not delivered.
The LibDems are beyond hope now, I think. After all, they failed on education a decade ago and people have long memories on such issues, of which the Tories should take note.
The Greens have a mountain to climb.
And the far right is now so deeply embedded in the Tories (as evidenced by the ghastly videos coming out of Dover) that there is no room for anther party there, thankfully.
The evidence is that the failure being seen is not, in that case, particular. And it's not even just widespread, although the number of U turns that this government has had to deliver suggests that it is that. Rather, it's systemic. And again, it's not just systemic to the Tories but pretty much across the entire political system. Even the SNP, which some south of the border seem to think a model for all that works, is riven by infighting as a result of central control by a very small elite that refuses to listen to its membership and their opinions, in the process evidencing many of the failings of all the other large parties.
Young people, whatever their aspirations, and those who work in universities, businesses and other institutions who need to rely on exam grades to help them achieve their ambitions have all been failed by a body politic that has shown insufficient ability to rise to the challenge that coronavirus has created.
They failed to understand the scale of the issue that they were facing.
They failed to act quickly.
They failed to appreciate that the old normal was history.
They failed by thinking that the right thing to do was to stick to old routines - like announcing student grades late in the day as if exams had been taken, when they had not been.
And they failed to foresee consequences - and so imposed caps on student numbers at the very time when becoming a student might be the best option available for many more young people.
It's easy to predict the failures to come as well.
The end of furlough will be a disaster.
Rising unemployment will seem to catch governments by surprise.
Business failures will do so, likewise.
Brexit gridlock will be a ‘price worth paying', just as excess deaths were.
Track and trace will fail again.
And the government will attempt to balance its books by imposing cuts in the middle of all this.
Most worryingly though, in the midst of all this the opposition parties - whether Labour or SNP - will have no alternatives of substance to offer because the leadership of both are (as, for the record, John McDonnell was) dedicated to the neoliberal model of balanced government budgets that denies them the chance to think of a different goal for government.
And that's why we have a crisis. Government has been neutered by an idea that always had the objective of neutering government so that a few might get very rich indeed in the resulting chaos.
Unless we reject that idea of neoliberal government we have no hope of getting out of this mess.
And yes, the alternative is MMT, because it says government is not limited by finance as all neoliberal schools of thought - including neo-Keynesianism - say it is. Right now it's the only basis for a democratic alternative to this complete shambles that we have got.
That does not say MMT is a panacea.
Nor does it say things can't go wrong when using MMT logic.
But look at where we are. MMT offers an alternative that is better, by far, than anything we have got, and can only improve.
To progress we need a revolution. MMT will be at its core because it, alone, is saying another form of democratic politics is possible right now.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
“To progress we need a revolution. MMT will be at its core because it, alone, is saying another form of democratic politics is possible right now.“
Another form of politics? What you not happy with democratic general elections? Like we had last year?
Of course I’m happy with democracy
I’m not happy with the choices we were offered
But clearly you did not read that far
Rather like Alfie and Jesse never read much, and seem to be well acquainted with you
What makes you think we live in a democracy?
Our truly horrible FPTP voting system handed Boris & Dominic 100% of the power in just over 43% of the vote.
Democratic general election? Dream on.
It seems certain that even Lukashenko got more than 43%!
I would not be sure of that
This blog pretty much encapsulates how I have felt about our political system for decades. All that has changed is that ‘There is no alternative’ shifted to ‘There is an alternative, but no-one’s listening’.
I understand the frustration with Corbyn and McDonnell – but the one hope I had with them is that a) they genuinely cared about low income groups and the marginalized, b) they cared about people having a say in the governance of their country. To me this meant that MMT, had a chance of taking root within Labour. The current new management show every sign of reverting to the ‘bosses know best’ type of politics that has dominated for decades now. There is no way that the Labour will take the chance on something as controversial as MMT now. Look at the response to the BLM movement, pure British Establishment conservativism on display. There is no vision, just platitudes.
It is hard to see a way out of the current mess.
What is the difference between ‘track’ and ‘trace’. Test and track, yes; but track and trace? There may be a subtle difference, but I don’t see it. Yet, so many use the phrase.
I don’t know if the coronavirus system does it this way, but in principle once some has a positive “test”, there can be separate or interacting systems to “track” where people go (for example, recording their names at restaurants, or asking them to recount where they have been in the previous week or two – shops, transport, visitors, etc) and then systems to “trace” their contacts at those places. Hence the original name of “test, track, and trace”, although the outsourced English coronavirus project is now called just “NHS Test and Trace” (not that the outsourced contact tracers employed by Serco have much to do with the NHS, but attaching the label might ne intended to give us all a warm feeling).
The alliterative “track and trace” comes up in other contexts, such as verifying the circulation of drugs or tobacco products, to try to monitor where they go, but if necessary work the other way to trace them back to origin.
In March I registered a company at Companies House, The Green New Deal Party. There is a Facebook group set up a few weeks ago, with only a few older members at present but we have been writing a manifesto/statement based around MMT. In a short while I will be taking the project to a group of students who I hope will carry it in as a project. Te Party will be a socialist core ( we cannot tackle climate change and ecological destruction without tackling poverty and inequality as well) but set to forge a Green New Deal. The manifesto is pinned to the group and is evolving slowly. I too cringed every time I heard McDonnell talk about the budget and how their manifesto was ‘fully costed.’ Unfortunately, in trying to stay within the political and Westminster consensus an opportunity to destroy the current gangster/destructive capitalism was missed. Being mildly different to the Tories is not going to inspire. What is needed is a clear vision for young people to gather round. Or indeed, by a revolution. If there is no turn around shortly, our civilisation is due a crash landing.
We need to get the Green Party to take on board MMT and start climbing that mountain to a better world. Caroline Lucas seems to be edging that way, if Molly Scott-Cato can take it on board too, we are on our way.
Caroline Lucas understands MMT:-
https://www.carolinelucas.com/latest/financial-times-mark-carney-boosts-green-investment-hopes
I might have had something to do with that….
I am reminded of a cartoon in Venue, a now defunct ‘whats on’ magazine for Bristol & Bath, at election time. It seems very relevant now
TV interviewer asks a dirty punk what he wants to see after the General Election
Punk replies ‘Rioting on the Streets, The Overthrow of The Monarchy, Kill the Rich, Revolution!’
‘So who will you be voting for?’
‘Tory of course’
My inner Trotskyite murmers something similar to me. Perhaps one big collapse is better than the slow degredation we have been experiencing under New Labour and the former Conservatives.
Richard, I disagree with you about Corbyn. He would have handled both Covid and A level/GCSE much better. That said, his time is over. The one thing he did, was to bring into the public domain the idea that austerity was a political choice. It is now up to someone else to take that forward.
Sadly, I do agree that there are few capable of that. I hoped Clive Lewis might be more prominent, but like a number of posters on here, I think the Green party is the best hope. It must be persuaded to support MMT, (and to understand it), then promote it everywhere. That means it must educate its members in order to tackle head on, the lies that the MSM continue to spew.
Caroline knows the arguments
She’s seen Ann Pettifor and I disagree with each other!
Hi Richard, Interested to see where you and Anne disagree. Read both of you and recently Stephanie Kelton. I think the biggest fear is that the public won’t or can’t understand the concept of tax money not being the method of paying for ‘stuff!’
To be honest, I have no idea where Ann and I disagree because she never says the same thing twice, but is persistently rude about me and Stephanie
She certainly hates the idea that tax and money might be related, but I can’t say why
And she claims MMT promotes helicopter money and debt-free money, which it does not
But candidly, after that I am really not sure. For example, one day she wants independent central banks and the next day not, and so on
Britain is in a peculiar position whereby most citizens will understand all too clearly the injustice of getting mugged twice in a day for money on the street at knife point, an event which might be called double-dipping. However, when it comes to understanding the monetary system they live in which drives much of their daily activity they are oblivious in their belief government has no money of its own this gives the green light to a stealth form of double-dip mugging.
The logic of their belief is that only private sector banks can create money and they must obtain money from these banks by way of loans on which they pay interest to pay taxes to the government. This is the first dip mugging of the day!
The second dip mugging of the day is clearly the private sector bankers and their rich customers can borrow money at a special low interest rate and get the government to issue gilts at a higher interest rate!
It would seem that exercising logic is not a strong British attribute except for a rare few!
I very much agree that “to progress we need a revolution”, however all paths are blocked by the ‘winner takes all’ voting system (in reality a ‘loser loses all’ voting system).
So the revolution can ONLY come when ALL non-Tory parties get together and form a one-off ‘Proportional Representation’ party at GE2024, with two items on the manifesto:
1. Change the voting system to PR
2. Run the 1st ever ‘PR’ election with all parties running under their own flag
There’s only ONE thing stopping this from happening: The Labour party.
But, in the face the climate / eco catastrophes, Labour’s time of self-serving treachery is fast running out. So I believe that between now and 2024, Labour will bow to the ever-growing pressure of breakdown and that we will get that so-urgently-needed democratic revolution.
Its simply inevitable that ‘MMT logic’ + a GND is coming.
Labour is, I agree, the big problem
Another dismal failure in Scotland next year might make them see sense
Without sounding too pessimistic, we have been effectively living in a One Party State since 2010.
Since Labour’s vote collapsed in Scotland, it has had no chance of winning a parliamentary majority. (And now the same has happened with the “red wall”.)
(This makes Corbyn’s near win in 2017 even more remarkable)
The fact that Labour hasn’t realised this yet, is condemning us all to Tory incompetence for at least another 10 years.
There is no way Labour can overturn an 80 seat Tory majority at the next election no matter how bad the Tories screw up. (What would the swing need to be and is it the biggest in GE history?). Labour needs to win with a working majority, not just a handful of seats.
Hung parliament is the very best they can do.
A pact with all the other parties and a commitment to PR is the only option, but I fear that the upper echelons of the Labour Party are still in denial. They too want absolute power.
And whilst all this party politics is going on “Rome burns”.
Looking good in a suit isn’t going to save the planet.
Completely agree Vinnie and Stephen. Labour’s refusal to get rid of FPTP and replace it with PR in 1997 was Blair’s greatest failure, and an absolute betrayal of progressive politics. And Labour’s moronic tribalism, and its absolute refusal to work with other progressive parties to overcome FPTP is why we have a government composed of 25th rate riff-raff with a totally undeserved majority of 80.
There is absolutely no point in my voting any more unless Labour do what Stephen and Vinnie suggest at the next election. Sit down with the Greens, Lib Dems, Plaid and the SNP (assuming the Scots haven’t voted to leave the UK by then) and hammer out an agreement that in every single constituency in the UK there will be just one progressive candidate standing. Instruct all non Tory voters to vote for that person, and forget the ludicrous political tribalism of progressives fighting other progressives for the same pool of voters which splits the vote and lets awful Tory candidates win in far too many seats.
Thanks. Very well put.
Worth checking out are @makevotesmatter & @VoteLab4Tory on twitter.
…WARNING!: Prepare to feel your blood boil!
Sickoftaxdodgers.
And the Tories know it.
Hancock and Williamson can do what they like and know that they will get away with it.
The Tory press has their backs and they know that they will win the next GE regardless of how bad they perform now.
They can be utterly corrupt and still win the next GE.
All we can do is sit and watch it happen.
Just to add to the gloom.
The Tories won 43% of the vote on a turn out of 66% in the last GE.
That’s 27% of the whole electorate.
They could probably hold power on even less than 25% of the whole electorate.
Their job is made easy if they only have to keep 25% of the electorate happy to remain in government.
A big chunk of that 25% will be the over 65s. People who have benefited from the cradel to grave welfare state and probably own property and are doing OK, thank you very much. Not really effected by Tory policies.
The system is broken, but there is no way of fixing it.
One Party State.
When most voters in the UK don’t believe the government has any money of its own it’s clear they don’t recognise they’re being double-dip mugged.
They have to pay interest on private sector bank loans to pay their taxes, then these private sector bankers can make low interest loans to themselves as private citizens plus their rich customers, buy government gilts and get a higher rate of interest to pay off the loans and make a tidy profit. The higher rate of interest having to come out of taxes according to most voters’ logic if they get that far. Currently the margin maybe small (for obvious reasons GFC and Coronoavirus) but this was not always the case!
MMT despite its valiant efforts is a long way from knocking some sense into most voters heads!
One of the great strengths of Kelton’s The Deficit Myth is that it is written in understandable prose pitched at the general reader – no complex maths, charts and other distractions to turn people off. No suggestion that this stuff is for experts only and you, dear reader, don’t need to bother your silly little head with such esoteric matters ‘cos it’s safely in the hands of the “professionals”. No talking down, no suggestion that ordinary folk are too stupid to understand. Lots of repetition of the main points and the message that we “ordinary folk” have been sold a pup, a myth, by those who want to retain their elite status and their wealth.
I think there’s a lesson here, if we want to push a revolution in thinking to the general public. Why should we expect most people, who have the business of trying to earn a living, provide food for the family, heat the home, maybe have a holiday, to enquire deeply into the mechanics of fiscal and monetary matters? Keep it simple, but not simplistic, stupid.
PS, I think the videos can make that connection. (though I prefer the written word)
OK. Agree with Richard as usual, and most of the comments. But, what is confounding me is the blatant ambushing of health and social care via Covid, which has opened a gate through which they are driving the privatisation cart and horses. How did we get here? Is nobody horrified by the extent of this?
I am
Right On!
Rather than just MMT as a core I see three principles on which a new party should be built; a tripod being extremely stable.
1. MMT
2. Democratic reform: second chamber, PR, devolution and decentralisation of power
3. Green New Deal
The one thing that must be completely wiped off the map is the “Westminster Village.”
Well Gordon Liddle has formed a new party (see earlier post) with all the objectives you and Richard and many others shout from the rooftops about.. BUT is anyone getting onboard???..
You may be aware that the Trudeau Gov. in Canada just prorogued parliament until Sept 23rd in order to come up with a “truly progressive” agenda that will be put to a confidence vote. The former Finance Minister Bill Morneau resigned (according to the media because he was worried about the debt/deficit)Is it too much to hope that they have heard of MMT?!!!
You’d like to think not